Anthropocene “on hold”

Innovations begin with ideas of how the world should or should not be.

Anthropocene: The Human Epoch (2018), a provoking documentary by Canadian photographer Edward Burtynsky and filmmakers Jennifer Baichwal and Nicholas de Pencier, leaves us with stunning images of the world as it should not be.

I first discovered this documentary during the long-haul flight from Beijing to Vancouver during our winter trip. With two younger daughters traveling with me, I somehow got distracted. Thus, as appealing as it was, Anthropocene got put on hold.

On the flight back to Beijing, there was the word Anthropocene again: featured widely in the National Post column by Terence Corcoran.^[1]. He reflects whether Anthropocene has enough scientific weight to be accepted, or whether it follows more of a political agenda.  Corcoran also digs into the motivations of the documentary and the origins of the Anthropocene Working Group (AWC), and reviews what scientists, not fans of Antrhopocene, contend.

The premise of advocates working for and supporting the Anthropocene Working Group (AWC) is that the human race has permanently transformed the planet with negative impact. The human impact is so profound, that it calls for a new geological “cene” or epoch: the Anthropocene. Just as a timeline reference, we currently live in the Holocene epoch, which has brought about 12 thousand years of “stable climate” since the last ice age.

As I finally watched through the different episodes in the film (listed, for readers who have not seen it): Excavation, Terraforming,  Techno fossils, Anthroturbation , Boundary Limit, Climate Change and Extinction), I found myself uncomfortably sinking deeper and deeper both literally – into my plane seat – and figuratively – into a sense of indisputable truth. Had I not read Corcoran’s column before watching the film – I would have concluded that in fact we are doomed; that the main subject in the film, planet Earth, will perish and that our finale is coming at an accelerated pace. 

Stratigraphy experts, however, refute the AWC’s arguments to jumpstart The Anthropocene Epoch. They explain that a new strata is only defined by signals that occur globally and are found into deposits of geological records, and which take thousands and thousands of years. Even if Anthropocene has begun (in 1950 according to its proponents), it is still a sliver in the age of a four billion year-old planet.

Still, the scarring burning scenes from Kenya forced me to close my eyes to think about the positives in the film. An early moment of hope, is a reference to human creativity taking form in Michael Angelo’s flawless David, sculpted by the master using Carrara Marble, which is shown in the “Extraction” vignette of the film. There is also the technician working in a lithium mine in Chile, proud to contribute in the production of a material with high potential to reduce carbon footprint. And there is the commitment of the Kenyan woman vowing to not let one more precious elephant tusk go into illegal markets (let alone let another precious elephant to be poached for its tusks). 

At Davos, Sir David Attenborough brought up the word again. The latest Global Risks Report of the World Economic Forum^[2]identifies the Top Five risks worldwide for the last years. Top three global risks in terms of likelihood and four out of five in terms of impact, are related to the environment and climate change. An electrifying call was clearly articulated by sixteen year-old environmentalist Greta Thunberg: “I want you to act like our house is on fire, because it is”.

A new epoch or not, there is no way to simplify this story: our planet is at peril.  How can I explain this to my two girls? How can I move on as usual without thinking about my human impact? 

I might start by not denying the challenges, nor should corporations or governments. 

What if I summarize the story as it is understood now by environmentalists, scientists, and experts? If uncontrollable industrialization and exploitation of our resources keeps its pace, more species will be extinct, food supply will be a challenge, we will continue to see extreme climate change in action: floods, hurricanes, more pollution. The planet and us will undeniably suffer because climate change and the force of nature do not discriminate. My children won’t like the ending, and they will be mad, rightfully so. But then, what if we imagine another ending to this story, and build it together?

Let’s tap into the creativity and ingenuity, into the human inclination of creating beauty and aim for justice, which according to environmentalist Paul Hawken^[3], are powerful forces present in all levels of society. 

Can we individually start with little changes (be conscious of resources we waste, which are scarce and can pollute) that could make a meaningful difference? Spark some ways to solve challenges at a bigger scale? Recently, I saw a recycling company recollecting diverse materials and offering credits for it that can be exchanged for compost bins, plant seeds, led light bulbs. An effort in the right direction, where I currently live (Beijing).

Anthropocene might not be a household word yet, as its proponents expect. However, the environmental imperatives that it urgently conveys and the innovations and actions to reverse our impact on the planet cannot be put on hold.

---

^[1]CORCORAN, Terence. (January 4, 2019). Is Edward Burtynsky’s Anthropocene proof of ecological disaster – or power politics?National Post. Accessed online at https://nationalpost.com/opinion/terence-corcoran-edward-burtynskys-anthropocene-brings-a-heated-scientific-debate-into-the-mainstreamon January 22, 2019.

^[2]World Economic Forum. The Global Risks Report 2019.Consulted online at https://www.weforum.org/reports/the-global-risks-report-2019on January 24, 2019.

^[3]HAWKEN, Paul. (2013) The Ecology of Commerce Revised Edition: A Declaration of Sustainability. Harper Business.